Energy Cloud May Be Triggering Rapid DNA Changes & Evolution

Its called fun fantasy with big words. lol

reply to post by RadicalRebel

Show me one that does not involve some form of science and i will concede the point.

Do you understand the difference between science and the application of science?

These are engineering issues, not science.

You don't have to the concede the point. You are wrong no matter if you concede the point or not.

reply to post by LastStarfighter

Thanks for revealing this suppressed information. The four stranded DNA causing energy cloud is an interesting fantasy. Humans don't evolve over decades. Any energy that can alter DNA is generally called radiation sickness and promotes cancer. For instance, if you were to put your head in a beam of gamma ray energy your DNA would be altered.

Where is there any evidence that this interstellar cloud is producing radiation that reaches the Earth's surface?

reply to post by stereologist


You telling me im wrong doesnt make it so...
The info you seek on the radiation effects of the lic is within the research link i provided several times in this thread

reply to post by RadicalRebel


You telling me that device that rely on science is science doesn't make it so either.

There is a big difference between sweeping science under the rug and patent applications.

So far no one can show a single example of science being dismissed because it is inconvenient.

It stands so far that there are zero examples of science being dismissed because it was inconvenient.

reply to post by stereologist


We can dance circles around it all day but i dont have time for it.

The link i provided shows that there are people who do have such intent for whatever ends. To deny this doesnt happen within the scientific community is placing the burden of proof in your lap and givin the very nature of the topic its kind of redundant to even argue the point.

reply to post by RadicalRebel

The link i provided shows that there are people who do have such intent for whatever ends. To deny this doesnt happen within the scientific community is placing the burden of proof in your lap and givin the very nature of the topic its kind of redundant to even argue the point.

The issue is whether or not science sweeps under the cover things that are inconvenient.

You have yet to show a single issue where that happens. All made reference to issues that do NOT deal with science. Not sure why you are unable to understand the difference between science and its applications.

Here is the original statement I challenged

Unless, of course, they challenge the established preconceptions of our understanding of science and the nature of reality. That sh#t usually gets swept under the rug at best, if not publicly shunned by the scientific community simply for its uncomfortable implications and not its factual merit. Especially if it includes the forbidden word "spirituality".

My response to that post

You hear that false claim from hoaxers. Science revels in finding new and interesting issues. They are not swept under the table or considered uncomfortable by science.

Your post now.

You mean like this?
list of suppressed inventions...

Inventions are not science. How hard is that to understand?

Where is a science issue? The thread states that the patent office won't give a patent for a solar cell. What does that have to do with science? Nothing. That is politics. That is law. It is not science. I saw nothing whatsoever in that thread supporting the original statement.

If you think there is then pull it out and tell all of us. Till then you're dead wrong.

I'm coming in late to the discussion, and haven't read all the many pages.

I don't buy the hypothesis in the video- at least not in the way it is described.

On the other hand,
It rings bells for me. It reminds me of a strange dream I had one day, which was one of those in which I was receiving a "lesson". A disembodied narrator explaining thigns to me, and my seeing diagrams and illustrations.

One of the subjects that night was how evolutionary changes happen periodically in "leaps"- or times of quick changes, as opposed to gradual ones.

This is caused, I was told, by suddenly high radiation levels causing a lot of mutation, and environmental changes.
The kind of mutation an individual undergoes isn't random though- it is fashioned or directed by the consciousness... their intents, motivations, desires. (this is the real woo-woo part)
I was told our physical bodies are formed by the consciousness anyway, but in between these periods, the collective consciousness has more influence upon the basic shape. But during these periods, it is as if individual consciousness suddenly gets a boost and everyone gets to have a vote and put in their two cents, and the ones which adapt best form the basic shape for the collective during the next period of slower, progressive evolution.

It said radiation, therefore, is not necessarily bad, it all depends upon what you do with it with your mind.

Now, what exactly the type of radiation was being refered to was not specified. But what was interesting about this is that it was the day before the earthquake/tsunami/nuclear accident in Japan.

Ever since, i think about this when we mention the ongoing radiation that continues to spread into the ocean from that accident.
Radiation from sunlight could also be part of that.

The scientific part is that the fossil records show evidence of both slow progressive phyletic gradualism
as well as Punctuated equilibrium . And radiation does cause mutation.
How consciousness does or doesn't play a part in that, is hypothesis of the more far fetched kind- such as this energy cloud- but at least it doesn't pretend to be otherwise!

Originally posted by ExquisitExamplE

Now, allow me to share with you a snippet of what I've been reading lately that I believe speaks specifically to the idea of DNA changes and this idea of 'new energy'.

Now, this material is channeled material, so, if that upsets you, by all means, read no further.

This is one of those hallmarks of religion - that of "revealed truth". The problem with "revealed truth", generally provided by some sort of prophet, in this case "channeled", is that it is unverifiable, untestable, something you have to take on faith. Besides just being hogwash, that is.

A weakness of this is as follows: I just channeled a revelation by the Great and Powerful Hiram. He told me your source was an evil energy who is misleading you. There is no "new energy", in fact you are misusing the term, and there are no "DNA changes" other than the usual. He also says your momma dresses you funny. Oh, and in case you are a disbeliever, then read no more and simply go your way.

See? Anyone can make up any bovine waste and claim it as unchallengeable truth by simply claiming it came 'from beyond'. And then, of course, tacking on the usual horsehockey about 'if you want to question it, read no further!'. Right.

The difference between discovered truth, science, and 'revealed truth', religion, is that anyone can participate in discovered truth - by design, the path that the discoverer took is painstakingly documented, verified by many, and can be taken by YOU. "revealed truth", of course, is only revealed to the prophet or whatever, and purports to come from some unquestionable, unavailable source.

reply to post by RadicalRebel


It's extremely rare for raw scientific understanding to be "classified" - scientists tend to be, by nature, independent thinkers who do what they do for the enlightenment of everybody. On the other hand, of course, sensitive work paid for by governments is likely to be concealed.

An interesting case is the Bethe-Feynman formula, because we know it was discovered and also that it is secret.

The suppression of technology is a different issue altogether and there are any number of reasons why a patent might be refused. Perhaps the military have already developed the technology and have secret patents on it. Perhaps there genuinely is a concerted effort to suppress certain types of technology.

In reality, nothing any of us knows about has been suppressed. Because we know about it. But what do we actually know? Putting together the pieces is the business of science and it is much more interesting than inventing personal dogma.

Originally posted by RadicalRebel

Seems there are real scientists, doing real research using this "wrong" terminology....
Im starting to lose faith in your spoonfed retorts

StarburtsFoundation
Seems the guy running the show here has better credentials than you...guess whos word im im gonna take on the matter...

PAUL A. LaVIOLETTE, PH.D, received his BA in physics from Johns Hopkins, his MBA from the University of Chicago, and PhD from Portland State University

It's really too bad you don't actually read your cites. Seriously. But maybe you try and just can't make distinctions.

As little as I believe in LaViolette's conjectures, they're not related to this supposed 'energy cloud of galactic wave' thing being discussed in the thread. Really, it's quite different. LaViolette is talking about some periodic cosmic ray source, and the OP is babbling about some cloud of neutral gas we may or may not be traveling through.

Go back and relook the stuff you're using for cites.

reply to post by Bedlam


Do you think that all the people involved in channelling activities are fraudsters? Do you think they are consciously aware of making stuff up to dupe other people into a certain view of the world? Are they doing it or is it happening to them?

I have seen pages and pages of the output from these things and I find it hard to believe that the individuals concerned would go to such lengths just for a prank, though surely some people would if they thought there was a quid in it.

Robert Anton Wilson wrote some really interesting observations of his own experiences of making contact with alien intelligences from Sirius, which may or may not have been an aspect of his own subconscious.

Fascinating stuff.

Originally posted by seamus
I swear, next time I hear a debunker glibly state "accepted facts" without doing his own thinking, I'm gonna flip. I have news for you, Bedlam. We are not in orbit AROUND the sun; we're being dragged behind it just like the debris you mention. Look at www.feandft.com... for more technical info and watch this video if you're simply interested in how this can be:

I assure you, we are in fact in orbit around the Sun. The Sun moves, the local group moves, the galaxy moves. And all the little parts move along as gravity dictates. So, yes, if you looked at the total motion of the system, you'd likely see some sort of helical motion, since the Sun is moving, and we are as well. That does not obviate the fact that the Earth orbits the Sun. If you don't believe in gravity, step off a building.

I was mildly intrigued most of the way through out the video , until the bit that said because we have had a recent galactic plane alignment .. this is simply not true as i am sure someone on this thread have already stated. i think we passed through it a while ago...

I like the idea as a slow process, regions of the universe may very well interact with planets and suns differently bringing a piece of the evolutionary jigsaw to the table, but the sudden flipping of things and non-facts make me nervous.

The final nail in the coffin for me (sorry) was the word ' existence' spelled 'exsistence' (at the end)

I mean if you cant even get right the spelling of the very thing you are trying to explain, what hope have I that you have researched your facts?, when you cannot research that simple thing?

Originally posted by Bedlam
and the OP is babbling about some cloud of neutral gas we may or may not be traveling through.

reply to post by Bedlam


Well, we are:

The solar system is passing through an interstellar cloud that physics says should not exist..

The fact that the Fluff is strongly magnetized means that other clouds in the galactic neighborhood could be, too. Eventually, the solar system will run into some of them, and their strong magnetic fields could compress the heliosphere even more than it is compressed now. Additional compression could allow more cosmic rays to reach the inner solar system, possibly affecting terrestrial climate...
science.nasa.gov...

Not so neutral after all.

Originally posted by richard42smith
reply to post by Bedlam

 

Do you think that all the people involved in channelling activities are fraudsters? Do you think they are consciously aware of making stuff up to dupe other people into a certain view of the world? Are they doing it or is it happening to them?

Answer: mostly they are fraudsters. The ones that are not are delusional.

I have seen pages and pages of the output from these things and I find it hard to believe that the individuals concerned would go to such lengths just for a prank, though surely some people would if they thought there was a quid in it.

I've seen nuts churn out page after page of utter crap on the net. Project Avalon comes to mind. Also Time Cube. Schizophrenia tends to make you verbose, apparently.

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are

Not so neutral after all.

You need to consider you're in S&T - neutral means 'without charge', i.e. generally not ionized.

Not that it has no effect. Science - learn the terms.

eta:

Astronomers call the cloud we're running into now the Local Interstellar Cloud or "Local Fluff" for short. It's about 30 light years wide and contains a wispy mixture of hydrogen and helium atoms at a temperature of 6000 C

Note - wispy mixture of hydrogen and helium atoms. Not 'a river of energy' or an 'energy cloud'. No doubt you also noted (you posted it after all), that the source says 'we may eventually run into'. May. Eventually. Thus my 'may or may not' statement.

Is it a precept of new agers that they all look for keywords and don't read the articles for understanding? It seems to be on ATS.

reply to post by Bedlam


Well, I'm happy to see that you are willing to admit your mistake. My gosh, leading people to believe that the cloud that we're definitely passing through has no effect... What kind of agenda is behind your misinformation?

Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
reply to post by Bedlam

 

Well, I'm happy to see that you are willing to admit your mistake. My gosh, leading people to believe that the cloud that we're definitely passing through has no effect... What kind of agenda is behind your misinformation?

The agenda is truth. Your cite - does it say we are currently in 'the fluff' or does it say we may eventually be?

Answer, please. You do realize that space isn't empty. It's ALWAYS got hydrogen or helium in it to some extent. It's ALWAYS varying in density.

reply to post by Bedlam


We are currently moving through it according to the Nasa link that I provided in my post. Go back. take a look.